Subject: [Monami6] Need I-D reviews

From: "Plasser, Erich" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2007 15:15:11 +0100

Dear Nicolas, Thierry
 
I have reviewd and posted some comments to the draft "Analysis of
Multihoming in Mobile IPv6" 

Page2

"It is not the intention of this document to imply that all issues must
be solved in the short term."

Comment: This sentence gives a weak impression for the whole draft. I
propose to skip this sentence.

Page3

First sentences of Introduction:

"The use of multiple addresses (allocated to either a single interface
or multiple interfaces) is foreseen to provide ubiquitous, permanent and
fault-tolerant access to the Internet, particularly on mobile nodes
which are prone to failure or sudden lack of connectivity."

Comment: Multiple addresses cannot guarantee permanent access, but
higher probability for permanent access, it can provide for less error
prone, etc.

 

Again I have reviewd and posted some comments to the draft "Motivations
and Scenarios for Using Multiple Interfaces and Global Addresses"

Page6:

"3.1.  Need for Ubiquitous Access to the Internet"

Comment: The title ubiquitous is misleading. Typically an ubiquitous
access depends not only on the number of interfaces on the node but also
on the reliability of the network.

Page 6:

Comment: Issue 3.1 is also redirection of a flow as is issue 3.2

Page 10:

4.1

"Multiple interfaces bound to distinct technologies can be used to
ensure a permanent connectivity is offered, anywhere, anytime, with
anyone."

Comment: Multiple addresses cannot guarantee permanent access, but
higher probability for permanent access, it can provide for less error
prone, etc.

Page 10:

4. Goals and Benefits:

Comment:

Extent further important scenarios followed by multihoming: 

pre-authentication, 

bicasting, 

error correction,

monitoring of the available interfaces which of them has the best
quality, policy-based decision at which time interface should be
changed.

Comment: Insert the following aspect in page 17

6.7 Issues:

The listed issues are not complete.

Monitoring of the available interfaces which of them has the best
quality, policy-based decision at which time interface should be
changed.

best regards 

_______________________________
 
Erich Plasser
phone: +43 - (0) 51707 / 21475

_______________________________________________
Monami6 mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/monami6

---

From: Nicolas Montavont <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:01:27 +0100

Hi Andy, Erich and all,

I am trying to update draft-ietf-monami6-mipv6-analysis-01.txt.

First, thank to Erich Plasser and Andy Huang for their reviews. I  
encorage more people to read this draft to provide more feedback.

I just would like to check with the WG if the changes I want to make  
are ok for everybody.
I'll consider no responses to this email as a Yes from the working  
group to the proposed changes.

Here are some proposed changes :

On Jan 4, 2007, at 3:15 PM, Plasser, Erich wrote:

> „It is not the intention of this document to imply that all issues  
> must be solved in the short term.”
> Comment: This sentence gives a weak impression for the whole draft.  
> I propose to skip this sentence.

Agree to remove the sentence.

> “The use of multiple addresses (allocated to either a single  
> interface or multiple interfaces) is foreseen to provide  
> ubiquitous, permanent and fault-tolerant access to the Internet,  
> particularly on mobile nodes which are prone to failure or sudden  
> lack of connectivity.”
> higher probability for permanent access, it can provide for less  
> error prone, etc.

Agree to change "permanent" to higher probability for permanent access"

[skip the part on draft-ietf-monami6-multihoming-motivation- 
scenario-01.txt which will be dealt with in another email]

On Jan 15, 2007, at 5:01 AM, Andy Huang wrote:
> Hi, all
>
> I reviewed two drafts and here are some comments.
>
>

[skip draft-ietf-monami6-multiplecoa-01.txt which will be dealt with  
in another email]

>
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-monami6-mipv6- 
> analysis-01.txt
> ---------------------------------------
> I'm confused by the load sharing and load balancing, what's the  
> difference between them? From the draft it seems to me load sharing  
> is about the network traffic while load balancing is focused on  
> node itself. If so, it's better to describe it in more detail.

It is stated that terms in this document are those defined in  
references 4, 1, 3. In reference 3, sections 4.4 and 4.5 gives clear  
definition of load sharing and load balancing.
I don't think we need to re-write or copy/paste those definition in  
this document, so I propose to let it as it is.

>
> section 4.6
> I don't think preference settings are goals or benefits. It's just  
> a method to realize the goals.

I agree with you. I propose to remove preference settings from all  
goals and benefits section in the document.

>
> Section 5.1
> As I said, preference settings are not real goals. In case of one  
> interface and multiple prefixes, preference(address selection) does  
> exist in the view of technology, but what can users get from the  
> this kind of technical preference? Generally speaking, one  
> interface means just one kind of L2 access technology, there is  
> little benefits that users can get.
>
> Section 6.1
> <!--Source-->Address Selection, is it a typo?
> ----------------------------------------

It seems :)
But I didn't find it in the doc... did you read 01 version?

Thank you,

Nicolas

>
>
> Best regards
> Zhigang Huang
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Thierry Ernst"  
> <[email-masked]>
> To: "ml-ietf-monami6" <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2006 12:49 AM
> Subject: [Monami6] Need I-D reviews
>
>
>>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> The 3 WG I-D as currently available on the Monami6 page
>>
>> Analysis of Multihoming in Mobile IPv6
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-monami6-mipv6- 
>> analysis-01.txt
>>
>> Motivations and Scenarios for Using Multiple Interfaces and Global
>> Addresses
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-monami6-multihoming- 
>> motivation-scenario-01.txt
>>
>> Multiple Care-of Addresses Registration
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-monami6- 
>> multiplecoa-01.txt
>>
>>
>> are in pretty good shape, and we think that it is the right time  
>> to get
>> some in-depth reviews. We would be happy to get some volunteers;  
>> if you
>> are willing to, please report to Nicolas and I.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Monami6 Chairs.
>>
>>
>>